Share

(CPJ/IFEX) - 7 February 2012 - The issue of press accreditation continues to reverberate. In November, when the Occupy movement came into conflict with law enforcement across the country and at least 20 journalists covering the events were arrested, CPJ reported that disputes over press accreditation were at the center of many of those arrests. Last week, credentials played a role in the arrests of journalists not only at tumultuous Occupy demonstrations in Oakland but also inside the more hushed chambers of Capitol Hill.

The reporters and photographers who were rounded up along with protesters last year for demonstrating in allegedly unauthorized places found that their appeals as members of the press often fell on deaf ears. Across the country, police repeatedly refused to acknowledge as a journalist anyone who did not have what they considered to be official accreditation, leaving freelancers and new media journalists particularly vulnerable, CPJ reported.

At least six journalists found themselves in the same situation on January 28, when they were arrested during violent clashes between Occupy demonstrators and Oakland police officers in California. It was the largest roundup of journalists covering the Occupy movement since 10 were detained while reporting on the eviction from Zuccotti Park in New York on November 15. The journalists in Oakland were caught up in the mass arrests of several hundred demonstrators who were corralled by police officers outside a YMCA building, according to press reports.

For Susie Cagle, the scenario was familiar. The freelance journalist and cartoonist was arrested back on November 3, and after police officers belittled her press pass, was charged with "presence at the scene of a riot." After pressure by press freedom groups, the charges were dropped and Cagle said she was granted an official police press pass that was valid through the end of 2011. Cagle wrote in the Guardian that she was wearing the expired press pass, along with valid accreditations from the Guild Freelancers, when she was arrested on January 28. Because the police-approved pass had expired, she wrote, the arresting officer told her, "You're not press tonight." After being held for around 40 minutes, she was released without charge.

Yael Chanoff, a reporter for the San Francisco Bay Guardian, was not so lucky. The journalist wrote in the Bay Guardian that she was arrested, transported with other protesters to a county jail, and held for 20 hours. Chanoff had been hired by the Bay Guardian three weeks earlier and didn't have a police press pass, though she said she showed the police a business card and identification. She was charged with failure to leave the scene of a riot and has an arraignment scheduled for March 5.

Gavin Aronsen, an editorial fellow at Mother Jones magazine, reported that the police ignored his press credentials and transported him to a jail, where he was held in a cell for approximately one hour. Arresting officers told Kristin Hanes, a reporter with KGO radio, that her press credentials were only valid for San Francisco, not Oakland, and held in her custody on the scene for approximately 30 minutes, KGO reported. Vivian Ho, a journalist with the San Francisco Chronicle, posted on twitter that she was cuffed in zip-ties along with the other journalists, but convinced the police officers to release her shortly thereafter. Ho also had San Francisco police-approved credentials, according to Mother Jones. John C. Osborn of the weekly East Bay Express reported that he was arrested because he did not have police-accredited credentials and was held in custody for an hour. None of these journalists were charged.

On the other side of the country, the validity of credential rules and how they are enforced was called into question with the arrest of filmmaker Josh Fox on Capitol Hill on Wednesday. As The New York Times reported, Fox was seeking to film a congressional session on the natural gas drilling technique known as "fracking" for a follow-up to his Academy Award-nominated documentary "Gasland," which was highly critical of the process. A subcommittee of the House Science Committee scheduled a hearing at the last moment to discuss an EPA report that found fracking had caused water contamination in the city of Pavillion, Wyoming, a town that was featured in Fox's film. According to the Times, Fox said his appeals for accreditation were not answered, but he decided to attend the session with a small camera crew nonetheless. When Fox refused to stop filming the session, he was arrested.

In a press release after the hearing, the Committee said "Section 9(j) of the Committee's rules expressly states that 'Personnel providing coverage by the television and radio media shall be currently accredited to the Radio and Television Correspondents' Galleries.'" Democratic Representatives Brad Miller and Jerry Nadler told The Huffington Post, however, that it is extremely uncommon to turn away journalists or filmmakers who want to film hearings, which are open to the public. Miller tried to halt the session to allow Fox to stay, calling for a motion to allow "all of god's children" to film the hearing, according to Politico. Republican congress members, led by subcommittee Chairman Andy Harris, voted against it and capitol police led the filmmaker away in handcuffs. As Fox pointed out to The Huffington Post, there was no such censuring of the camera phones of congressional aides, some of whom filmed the arrest as can be seen here.

Fox, who was released shortly thereafter, was charged with unlawful entry and is scheduled to appear in court February 15. The filmmaker wrote in a statement: "As a filmmaker and journalist I have covered hundreds of public hearings, including Congressional hearings. It is my understanding that public speech is allowed to be filmed. Congress should be no exception."

More from United States

Americans witnessed several major cyberattacks in the latter half of 2016, including the hacking and subsequent leaking of sensitive information from the Democratic National Committee in the lead up to the vote

The report examines the rise of fraudulent news, defined here as demonstrably false information that is being presented as a factual news report with the intention to deceive the public, and the related erosion of public faith in traditional journalism. The report identifies proposed solutions at the intersection of technology, journalism, and civil society to empower news consumers with better skills and tools to help them process the torrents of information they see online.

Political polarization in the media worsened during the presidential campaign, due in part to the emergence of “alt-right” news sites that disseminated highly nationalistic or nativist messages, conspiracy theories, and at times false or propagandistic coverage.

Which companies stand with their users, embracing transparency around government data requests? Which companies have resisted improper government demands by fighting for user privacy in the courts and on Capitol Hill? In short, which companies have your back?

"Congressional efforts in 2012 to adopt legislation to prevent copyright infringement on the Internet were shelved in response to strong opposition from leading Internet companies, websites, and ordinary users"

Free Expression & the Law:

More from Free Expression & the Law

The general trend over the past 10 years has been bleak, with an overall negative trajectory for press freedom. The major turning point was the election of Xi Jinping as General Secretary of the Communist Party of China in 2012 and President of China in 2013.

In 2014, Cameroon enacted a broad anti-terror law as part of its effort to counter the extremist group Boko Haram, but authorities are using it to arrest and threaten local journalists who report on the militants or unrest in the country’s English-speaking regions.

Since 2013, law enforcement authorities in Bangladesh have illegally detained scores of opposition activists and held them in secret without producing them before courts, as the law requires. In most cases, those arrested remain in custody for weeks or months before being formally arrested or released. Others however are killed in so-called armed exchanges, and many remain “disappeared.”

This study examines the existence of criminal defamation and insult laws in the territory of the 57 participating States of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE). In doing so, it offers a broad, comparative overview of the compliance of OSCE participating States’ legislation with international standards and best practices in the field of defamation law and freedom of expression.

READ AND DOWNLOADThis study analyses current trends in civil defamation and privacy cases in Hungary involving the media and summarises key challenges for freedom of the press and expression. Written by Hungarian media lawyer Bea Bodrogi, the study examined 250 court decisions related to civil protection of 'personality rights', an area in Hungarian law that includes defamation, privacy and personal image.

Freedom Forum has issued a review of Nepal's National Mass Communications Policy 2016. Among others, FF says the policy fails to articulate constitutional provisions relating to freedom of expression and mass communication. The policy, they said, also seems to promote centralided regulation, instead of self-regulation.

The Communist Party of Vietnam (CPV) in 2016 maintained its control over all public affairs and punished those who challenged its monopoly on power. Authorities restricted basic rights, including freedom of speech, opinion, association, and assembly. All religious groups had to register with the government and operate under surveillance. Bloggers and activists faced daily police harassment and intimidation, and were subject to arbitrary house arrest, restricted movement, and physical assaults.

Malaysia's human rights situation continued to deteriorate in 2016, with human rights defenders, activists, political opposition figures, and journalists facing harassment and politically motivated prosecution. Those criticising the administration of Prime Minister Najib Razak or commenting on the government's handling of the 1 Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB) corruption scandal have been particular targets.

Authorities continue to use sedition and criminal defamation laws to prosecute citizens who criticise government officials or oppose state policies. In a blow to free speech, the government in 2016 argued before the Supreme Court in favour of retaining criminal penalties for defamation. The court upheld the law.

After already cracking down on freedom of information in recent years, President Erdoğan has taken advantage of the abortive coup d’état and the state of emergency in effect since 20 July to silence many more of his media critics, not only Gülen movement media and journalists but also, to a lesser extent, Kurdish, secularist and left-wing media.

This publication presents the findings of the media development assessment in Mongolia that began in 2012 to determine the state of the media in the country. The assessment was based on the UNESCO/IPDC Media Development Indicators (MDIs), an internationally recognized analytical tool used to provide detailed overviews of national media landscapes and related media development priorities.

“After the initial optimism during the Euromaidan movement, many journalists have become disillusioned. They are faced with the triple challenge of the war in the Eastern part of the country, the economic crisis and the digitalization of mass media.”

An officer of the Myanmar army recently filed a criminal complaint against two journalists for allegedly sowing disunity among the military. Even though mediation by the Press Council caused the military to withdraw the case, this incident demonstrates how the military continues to throw its weight to get back at what it perceives as negative publicity.

The government uses draconian laws such as the sedition provisions of the penal code, the criminal defamation law, and laws dealing with hate speech to silence dissent. These laws are vaguely worded, overly broad, and prone to misuse, and have been repeatedly used for political purposes against critics at the national and state level.

IFEX publishes original and member-produced free expression news and reports. Some member content has been edited by IFEX. We invite you to contact [email protected] to request permission to reproduce or republish in whole or in part content from this site.